Are you saying that this flag doesn't work? It does for me in PyGimp -- I use it most of the time.
On 8/24/06,
saulgoode@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <saulgoode@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This looks like a Script-fu bug. PyGimp doesn't do this, it just returns the parasite itself.
I did some tests on this awhile ago, and IIRC they don't get reused until a very long time (about 2^31 iterations of creating new layers/vectors/channels). Much the same as IDs in that respect.
Parasites:
Is there a philosophical reason that parasite changes are not
UNDOable? If not, could someone provide a nudge on how "non-tile"
information is saved to the UNDO history (for example, layer name
changes)?
Also, the "*-parasite-find" PDB functions return a list containing a
single list: for example,
(("gimp-comment" 1 #18"4372656174656420776974682047494d5000"))
This looks like a Script-fu bug. PyGimp doesn't do this, it just returns the parasite itself.
Tattoos:
If an object has a specific tattoo assigned to it then, when the
object is destroyed, is the tattoo value made available for re-use?
For example, I have three layers and record their tattoos. I then
merge those layers which generates a new layer (with a new tattoo).
Can I rely on the tattoos of the original layers not being assigned to
a new object (during that image editing session)? (If so, I would like
to assign the original tattoo to the merged layer.)
I did some tests on this awhile ago, and IIRC they don't get reused until a very long time (about 2^31 iterations of creating new layers/vectors/channels). Much the same as IDs in that respect.
_______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
